Tom is real. (Usually). Had another nick a couple years back on ECW, lately seems less in Rossi’s thrall...
But what about Jean Claude, who became (slowly morphed into) Jean Paul?
And even I forget my first name Travchenko, who even signs off as AR?
Paradigmnoia
Member
- Member since Oct 23rd 2015
Posts by Paradigmnoia
-
-
In UK but this is not the case, the magician is under judicial in Miami-Dade County Florida USA.
He will drop dead of natural causes before this gets sorted.
Not a wish or threat... just reality.
-
About this kind of lawsuit does the possibility of prescription exist after a certain number of years without a final judgment?
If yes (apart paied witness solution) the magician would like not better then.
The court seems to have made a “shit or get off the pot” statement, I think, to spur things along.
Rossi would be pleased with the whole thing just going away if he ignores it long enough because that is what he is used to. But since Rossi seems to be wanting to leave Annesser stuck with the bill, if the court decides he was the one who contracted IST for Rossi, then Annesser will likely have to then sue Rossi for repayment. Just a guess but Rossi will likely claim he paid Annesser enough already and this extra expense is not his problem. Therefore five more years of this is possible.
-
Clearly the Deep State are worried about Rossi's amazing LED lamp.
They tricked Rossi into not paying the invoice so they can tangle him up in legal tape.
Hehe. They have miscalculatd. The Maestro of Milan has much experience with being in courts or law.
And of course he is totally innocent ... again.
The plaintiff has confirmed to the court the desire to continue this lawsuit, now into its 5th year.
-
The basic idea is to use a container that can’t add anything that one intends to measure, obviously, and the choice in this case is PP beakers, which is the same used by Lu et al. PP can only add C and O, and that is sampled with the distilled water “blank”. Wood would introduce a lot of potential contaminants so is discarded from start. Stainless steel could also be used but it’s always preferred something transparent for observing the reaction. Glass is not recommended as it can also add contaminants and can always be a security hazard when used with a sonotrode.
All sounds great. I was just checking off the boxes.
K to Ca seems like something possibly relatively easy to repeatedly test for, analytically, by common methods. If one were to set up to do it, anyways.
-
This assumes Rossi's character witnesses (Mats and Frank) don't convince the judge that Rossi is saving the world, so the case should be dropped.
When Rossi and his former lawyer Annesser publicly turn on each other, many character references will likely be plentifully and freely exchanged
-
We don’t know the isotopic ratio of our particular KCl, we just know we started without detectable Ca and we end with some after 5 minutes. By blind test you mean sonicating distilled water? If so we haven’t, yet. Our blind is stirring the solution with an equivalent amount of energy input with non cavitation system (the classic magnetic stirrer).
But about sonicating distilled water, literature has reported new elements in distilled water after 30 minutes of sonication. Omasa has also done it but takes several hours to see new elements with his system (25 hours I recall).
We intend to do such a test at some point but our sonotrode is good for 5 minute continuous runs only, so we have to allow pauses to emulate the 30 minutes of Cardone et al.
Probably you thought about this already, but have you repeated the Ca increase in different types of container (metal, glass, plastic, wood)?
-
It has already happened, the prospect of years and years of waiting for a legal action that will likely end in a prescription and the loss of more money than can be obtained in future from an unsure sentence is enough to give up.
The magician and his lawyers well know all the possible tricks to get to this.
Except here there are two differences.
The plaintiff is a company that sorts and manages legal documents for lawyers. They are very well legalled-up and are certainly aware of all the tricks and delays themselves.
The plaintiff already said in a deposition something to the effect of “ I don’t care if it drags on ten years and costs a million dollars, I’m right, they are wrong, and I will fight to the end.”
-
On the other hand, and specifically about Omasa's patent, I wonder, what woud be the logic behind attempting to patent a fraud?
Non-specifically, some people use patent applications (and rarely, but occasionally, even get an approved patent) as support to their believability, and to increase their public visibility. The excuse that the patent office dislikes/bans ‘cold fusion’ type claims is useful for defending especially weak applications, although it can be true in addition to being an excuse.
-
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 17-012030-CA-01
INNOVATIVE SERVICE TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
LEONARDO CORPORATION, et. al. Defendants,
PLAINTIFF’S RE-NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned will take the oral deposition of:
NAME DATE AND TIME LOCATION
Innovative Service Technology Management Services, Inc.’s Corporate Representative with the most knowledge concerning the subject matters identified in Schedule “A” attached hereto.
May 28, 2021 9:00 a.m. EST
Virtual/Zoom/Webex
Andrea Rossi
May 29, 2021 9:00 a.m. EST
Virtual/Zoom/Webex
upon oral examination via remote virtual as described below.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that, due to disruptions to travel and accompanying shelter-in-place order caused by COVID-19 virus, Plaintiffs intend to take the depositions remotely, via videoconferencing equipment. As this deposition will be taken virtually, the reporter and witnesses will be in remote locations.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the deposition will be taken before a person authorized by law to take depositions virtually, a Notary Public, or any other public or officer ...
-
Paradigmnoia , as you well know doing experiments is never really simple, and when you attempt to test things that go against the grain, you need to be even more careful than in normal circumstances. If I get to the stage when a replication is possible, it will be done with rigor to control all sources of error and with an experimental design to rule out randomness.
I have experienced two episodes of Insufficient Heat that are hard-to-impossible to duplicate.
-
Display More
I think that our fellow Cherepanov2020 is trying to imply that there’s no radiation at all. Is hard to distill anything of substance from his bulky posts but at some point he has clearly stated that he disagrees entirely with Parkhomov’s N-radiation idea.
I started this thread based on my knowledge of Parkhomov’s work mainly through reading his book Space.Earth.Human.One can disagree with him and probably many people may never forgive him for writing chapter 4, I found it interesting anyway.
He may employ simple and - certainly there are people that may perceive his as rudimentary- methods, but as I have said before, these are the kind of classic methods of late XIX and early XX century when many advances were achieved by similar means.
Remember he derived his work from analysis of nuclear decay rate variation associated with astronomic alignments, and from classic knowledge he attempted to build an explanation.
I know that, at the end of the day, replication of published results is what matters, and as his work exposing a solution of KNO3 to a lightbulb where he observed significant changes in the elemental proportions of the elements compared to the untreated solution, seems simple enough for me to try and will propose it to my colleague when we are done with our current task list.
Theory and testing is great.
I hope you do a good test, and may you find success.
However, a short list of LENR/ZPE/XH researchers have an atypical amount of ‘strong’ success with several different approaches (each, over a relatively short period of time). Parkhomov, Rossi, Me356, Mizuno, Lion, for example. And yet independent replications of their work almost always fail to reproduce the claimed original results, and even the replications that are claimed to work are generally much, much weaker than the original work, are even more questionable in terms of quality of work, or are so weakly described that they cannot be relied on.
The strong evidence of macroscopic effects seems to be lacking, regardless of many claims of success and the subsequent pronouncements of the impending to imminent demise of the hydrocarbon fuel age. -
Although the more precise answers are impure, disordered varieties of carbon can be ferromagnetic, pure carbon is generally not magnetic, and magnetite is a magnetic product of combustion of a common strike anywhere matchstick tip, these facts are beside the point.
The subject of this thread was Strong Evidence for a new kind of radiation.The ‘strong evidence’ seems not so strong.
Conjecture over the magnetism or not of a matchstick just show how weak this strong evidence is, it seems to me.
-
Much as I love this stuff, I'm not going to spend 30 minutes watching a video about pickle jars and matches.
I want to see 1/2 hr of people navigating wilderness with a matchstick compass...
-
What else do you expect??Pure Carbon is magnetic!
I expect you to note the instructions and NOT burn the whole match, but just the igniter tip.
But anyways, why does the 'real' magnetic stuff act different from the 'electric' magnetic stuff?
-
No problem ... Take the glass jar. Hang a match under the lid of the jar ... At a distance of 15-20 cm, place a plastic ruler, which you pre-rub with paper so that your fingers begin to feel the heat that comes from the ruler ... The match begins to behave like a magnet ... But the tree does not is a magnet and does not have pronounced magnetic properties ...
Physichemistry of the microworld, Experiments proving that there is no electrostatics in nature, part 2 -
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.The fresh match does not quite act like a magnet, and is unlikely to be attracted to one (or the ruler to a real magnet).
Now light a wood match, just enough to get the rapid ignition of the tip complete, put it out, and hang it from a string. A magnet will now attract it. But only when quite close. A very powerful magnet may attract it from many cm away, but probably not >15 cm away. -
The difference in our approaches is more fundamental ... According to Wien's law, it is the photons that characterize the temperature ... This is the first ... Photons, according to the physical chemistry of the microworld, interact with their spins with the spins of free electrons ... Photons pump free electrons with their mass - this is what increases them " magnetic potential "...
Ok, photons pumped, energy release imminent, and how do we test for it happening?
Parkhomov finds excess heat almost everywhere he looks, (whether his theory is correct or not), and 10 to 20% excess should be easy to see at the 40 to 300 watt power range, with even quite rudimentary test equipment, such as those which Parkhomov and his assistants have ingeniously assembled several of, for example, over the past 5 years. -
Display More
Assuming that the anomalous cloud chambers tracts are strange radiation, the ability for this strange radiation to effortlessly enter a closed cloud chamber shows that strange radiation is able to pass through solid matter without any loss of energy.
The assumption is that there are some number of atoms involved in the seed around which strange radiation forms. The process that transforms metallic hydrogen into strange radiation seems to remove the solidity of atomic matter so that atoms can pass through other atoms.
And yet this radiation can interact with the cloud inside the chamber to show its path of flight. It seems to be correct to assume that there are undiscovered factors involved with strange radiation in that it is somehow able to distinguish what type of matter that it is interacting with.
The rules that define how this type of matter/radiation interacts with other matter/radiation is not yet defined.SR seems to be able pass perpendicularly right through almost everything without resistance, and yet can’t resist making long squiggly marks on surfaces that are nearly in the same plane as the particle moves in. Strange indeed.
-
For the above, an IR “heat mirror” cutoff, dichroic filter lamp might make a safer and possibly better test than foil-wrapped lamps.
-
So you do not notice WHAT I am writing ... And I am writing that Wien's law is better for these purposes than the Stefan-Boltzmann law ... But you ignore it ... Why?
It doesn’t matter which one uses in this instance, simply because the original point was the examples of normal operating temperature of the tungsten filament in normal operating conditions, and the light output per W and spectrum discussions, as part of a larger useable light efficiency discussion, are mostly moot.
However, if the idea is that at the higher W filament temperatures, UV is increased, and this UV is the cause of the beginning of a reaction event, then total UV output (per input W ?), rather than strictly the filament temperature, is more important.(I haven’t heard of UV water disinfection systems being called out for being ‘over unity’, but probably no one has tried to find out)
